[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
There is no guarantee that anybody gains freedom, or enlightenment, from anything they do. However, a purification of consciousness needs to take place, to at least entertain the possibility. It is not a matter of enlightenment having been here all along. Rather, it is culturing the ability, within ourselves, to recognize it, and become it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: I found this series of exchanges very informative. I wonder how many here ever wonder whether moksha, satori, awakening, 'enlightenment', was ever really necessary in the first place. All roads were always Rome from the beginning. Why do we make such a big deal out of it? The payoff is tautological.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Yes, all paths lead to Rome. The *establishment* of Silence in activity, is really the key symptom for starting any inquiry about the endpoint of various forms of meditation. Whatever it is we seek to become intimate with, be it a deity, or life itself, that object doesn't care how we achieve that intimacy. In other words, the universal objective of us humans, is to transcend our apparent limitations, through any way possible; technology, religion, money, sex, drugs, love, meditation, books, concepts, thoughts, language, adventure, cults, and food, for a few examples. We are all trying to reach a life of inner peace, of a quiet mind, of boundless abilities, in any domain of exploration. To live our birthright. How we get there, and learn to live in boundless silence, is a personal choice. But the end result, for anyone, is the same, a life lived in freedom, confidence, success, and endless discovery. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@... wrote: Well, thing is, is TM-style enlightenment the same as enlightenment defined by some other tradition, or not? There are plenty of physiological states that can lead to teh same general description. The fact that two different states can be described the same way make them the same in some mystical sense, or is it merely an accident of language and culture that they are both considered enlightenment? L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: I meant enlightenment as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to enlightenment defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. There's several fundamental differences in how teh nervous system behaves in long-term TMers and long-term practitioners of mindfulness, and most other forms of meditation. Specifically: most other forms of meditation depress the activity of the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for sense of self. TM enhances those same parts of the brain. Most other forms of meditation serve to decouple various parts of the brain from each other, making them less and less in-synch as time goes on. TM has exactly the opposite effect. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
I found this series of exchanges very informative. I wonder how many here ever wonder whether moksha, satori, awakening, 'enlightenment', was ever really necessary in the first place. All roads were always Rome from the beginning. Why do we make such a big deal out of it? The payoff is tautological.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
It is the Goal of Life. necessary --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: I found this series of exchanges very informative. I wonder how many here ever wonder whether moksha, satori, awakening, 'enlightenment', was ever really necessary in the first place. All roads were always Rome from the beginning. Why do we make such a big deal out of it? The payoff is tautological.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 no_reply@... wrote: It is the Goal of Life. necessary That was a vaguely rhetorical question I asked, but in terms of pursuing a goal, moksha has a rather peculiar resolution compared to other kinds of goal seeking. Put it this way: if the resolution of the search is pretty much what you expected, then moksha is not what was found. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: I found this series of exchanges very informative. I wonder how many here ever wonder whether moksha, satori, awakening, 'enlightenment', was ever really necessary in the first place. All roads were always Rome from the beginning. Why do we make such a big deal out of it? The payoff is tautological.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Yes. There is no experience to compare, so that's not going to help. There are no words to describe, so that's not it, there's... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 no_reply@ wrote: It is the Goal of Life. necessary That was a vaguely rhetorical question I asked, but in terms of pursuing a goal, moksha has a rather peculiar resolution compared to other kinds of goal seeking. Put it this way: if the resolution of the search is pretty much what you expected, then moksha is not what was found. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: I found this series of exchanges very informative. I wonder how many here ever wonder whether moksha, satori, awakening, 'enlightenment', was ever really necessary in the first place. All roads were always Rome from the beginning. Why do we make such a big deal out of it? The payoff is tautological.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
emptybill: Recently the term enlightenment became a silly Neo-Hindu neologism (i.e. post-Vvekananda) and Neo-Buddhist synonym for Japanese Zen kensho or satori, particularly by euro-american buddhist writers. OH C'MON!!! REALLY?! Stop this nonsense trying to mislead the TMers. This is just a word game. You haven't even defined 'TM'. Go figure. Looking into one's nature or the opening of satori; This acquiring of a new point of view in our dealings with life and the world is popularly called by Japanese Zen students 'satori' (wu in Chinese). It is really another name for Enlightenment or (Annuttara-samyak-sambodhi). Source: 'An Introduction to Zen Buddhism' D.T. Suzuki Grove Press, 1949 p. 88.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
I meant enlightenment as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to enlightenment defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. There's several fundamental differences in how teh nervous system behaves in long-term TMers and long-term practitioners of mindfulness, and most other forms of meditation. Specifically: most other forms of meditation depress the activity of the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for sense of self. TM enhances those same parts of the brain. Most other forms of meditation serve to decouple various parts of the brain from each other, making them less and less in-synch as time goes on. TM has exactly the opposite effect. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term meditators who never got the advanced technique and those that did. That wasn't mentioned in the study. Basically you have researches who probably don't know much about yoga at all: blind men describing an elephant. The topic was enlightenment in general and not TM-style enlightenment of which there is no such thing. Enlightenment is enlightenment. On 07/17/2013 01:49 PM, sparaig wrote: The topic is TM-style enlightenment, and while you have a point about parroting, the first report of enlightened TMers was from a psychologist reporting about 6 of his patients, TMers all, who were complaining of a permanent depersonalization with no issues other than intellectual confusion as to why their I was completely uninvolved with thinking, feeling, acting, remembering, etc. The report prompted the DMS-IV to add a spiritual/religious exception to the diagnosis of depersonalization disorder. The fact that the patients had forgotten, or didn't make the connection, between their state and the CC state in TM theory, suggests that it is a natural progression due to TM practice, rather than expectations. A more recent study looked at non-TMers who happened to be world champion/national champion athletes (compete at the national level and consistently score in teh top 10) vs non-champion athletes at the same level (compete in the same competitions but never break the 50% mark) and found that the champions tended to score midway between teh short-term TMers and the enlightened TMers on both their EEG and their descriptions of self. This also supports the theory that the TM-style enlightenment is a natural thing, leading to similar descriptions of the state, regardless of your spiritual background (none of the athletes did TM or other meditation techniques). L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: And where's the group that practiced other meditation programs? Also TM people start sounding like parrots of stuff they learned from SCI, rounding courses, etc. They can't seem to put their experiences in their own words. On 07/16/2013 11:39 PM, sparaig wrote: People respond to the interview question Describe your self, in different ways, depending on the physiological state of their nervous system. Researchers on the
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@... wrote: I meant enlightenment as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to enlightenment defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. There's several fundamental differences in how teh nervous system behaves in long-term TMers and long-term practitioners of mindfulness, and most other forms of meditation. Specifically: most other forms of meditation depress the activity of the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for sense of self. TM enhances those same parts of the brain. Most other forms of meditation serve to decouple various parts of the brain from each other, making them less and less in-synch as time goes on. TM has exactly the opposite effect. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term meditators who never got the advanced technique and those that did. That wasn't mentioned in the study. Basically you have researches who probably don't know much about yoga at all: blind men describing an elephant. The topic was enlightenment in general and not TM-style enlightenment of which there is no such thing. Enlightenment is enlightenment. On 07/17/2013 01:49 PM, sparaig wrote: The topic is TM-style enlightenment, and while you have a point about parroting, the first report of enlightened TMers was from a psychologist reporting about 6 of his patients, TMers all, who were complaining of a permanent depersonalization with no issues other than intellectual confusion as to why their I was completely uninvolved with thinking, feeling, acting, remembering, etc. The report prompted the DMS-IV to add a spiritual/religious exception to the diagnosis of depersonalization disorder. The fact that the patients had forgotten, or didn't make the connection, between their state and the CC state in TM theory, suggests that it is a natural progression due to TM practice, rather than expectations. A more recent study looked at non-TMers who happened to be world champion/national champion athletes (compete at the national level and consistently score in teh top 10) vs non-champion athletes at the same level (compete in the same competitions but never break the 50% mark) and found that the champions tended to score midway between teh short-term TMers and the enlightened TMers on both their EEG and their
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
if you are the example we can discount the TM is a reliable way to clean up the mind From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:47 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...] Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@... wrote: I meant enlightenment as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to enlightenment defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. There's several fundamental differences in how teh nervous system behaves in long-term TMers and long-term practitioners of mindfulness, and most other forms of meditation. Specifically: most other forms of meditation depress the activity of the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for sense of self. TM enhances those same parts of the brain. Most other forms of meditation serve to decouple various parts of the brain from each other, making them less and less in-synch as time goes on. TM has exactly the opposite effect. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term meditators who never got the advanced technique and those that did. That wasn't mentioned in the study. Basically you have researches who probably don't know much about yoga at all: blind men describing an elephant. The topic was enlightenment in general and not TM-style enlightenment of which there is no such thing. Enlightenment is enlightenment. On 07/17/2013 01:49 PM, sparaig wrote: The topic is TM-style enlightenment, and while you have a point about parroting, the first report of enlightened TMers was from a psychologist reporting about 6 of his patients, TMers all, who were complaining of a permanent depersonalization with no issues other than intellectual confusion as to why their I was completely uninvolved with thinking, feeling, acting, remembering, etc. The report prompted the DMS-IV to add a spiritual/religious exception to the diagnosis of depersonalization disorder. The fact that the patients had forgotten, or didn't make the connection, between their state and the CC state in TM theory, suggests that it is a natural progression due to TM practice, rather than expectations. A more recent study looked at non-TMers who happened to be world champion/national
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumb...@rocketmail.com wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. Your problem is a straw man. Lawson didn't pretend it was a TM-Teacher Term Complete with Capitalized Words. It was an informal descriptive phrase he composed to clarify something *you* had misunderstood concerning what he'd posted, and he defined it precisely: I meant 'enlightenment' as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to 'enlightenment' defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. DrD feels this isn't a valid distinction, which is a reasonable objection, whether accurate or not. Insisting nastily that Lawson shouldn't have used that phrase because *you* never heard it is a thoroughly unreasonable objection. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Hey Bari2 - moksha/mukti, from the root muc means to set free or release from bondage and thus the English word liberation is accurate. As you pointed out, the translation of moksha as enlightenment is inaccurate. (See note below)* Bari2: In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. Not just regular TM'ers but TM teachers also a case in point is Susan Seagal's Collision with the Infinite. Bari2: If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara Fyi - SSRS (whose sahaj meditation technique is the same) pointed out that all these bija mantras coalesce into omkara at the finest level of experience. He did, in fact, give me omkara with a mahamantra. *Aufklärung Clearing Up. There is no thing as enlightenment - as that term is used here o FFL. There has never been an enlightenment - whether discovered, realized or attained. That includes immediate insights or gradual understandings. There was only Aufklärung Clearing Up. Enlightenment? There never was and never will be such a thing - except as the title for a cultural movement in British history. This term was used as a title for an 18th century European cultural era, which in English was called The Enlightenment but originally in German was titled Zeitalter der Aufklärung - the Age of Clearing Up. Recently the term enlightenment became a silly Neo-Hindu neologism (i.e. post-Vvekananda) and Neo-Buddhist synonym for Japanese Zen kensho or satori, particularly by euro-american buddhist writers. Any object, any state or any condition that has a beginning also has an end by definition. Experience, also by definition, is a temporary appearance to a perceiver. Any experience of enlightenment is likewise just a transient occurrence that is judged (after the fact) to be oh-so-significant. All this is utter make-believe. It is a false interpretation - both of Shankara's Advaita and of Buddhist Mahamudra and Dzogchen. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Hi, No, I was not a TM teacher. When I reached the point of going on TTC I was disenchanted with the org, so it didn't happen. I worked for the TMO three different times for about three years, total - did the sids also, but no advanced techniques, or any of the stuff from the last 30 years. Yeah I get what you are saying, and agree that the most important distinction is that the 'end state' if you will, keeps growing. Paradoxically, that sustainability is one element that defines it, unlike the perfect mood/thought/bank account or or other static symbol, that the ego associates with enlightenment, prior to consciousness being established in silence. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
I thought you had to do a couple of (expensive) advanced techniques before they'd let you into the hopping room to learn sidhas. Am I wrong about that? [And the SCI basic course also.] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Hi, No, I was not a TM teacher. When I reached the point of going on TTC I was disenchanted with the org, so it didn't happen. I worked for the TMO three different times for about three years, total - did the sids also, but no advanced techniques, or any of the stuff from the last 30 years. Yeah I get what you are saying, and agree that the most important distinction is that the 'end state' if you will, keeps growing. Paradoxically, that sustainability is one element that defines it, unlike the perfect mood/thought/bank account or or other static symbol, that the ego associates with enlightenment, prior to consciousness being established in silence. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@ wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: I thought you had to do a couple of (expensive) advanced techniques before they'd let you into the hopping room to learn sidhas. Am I wrong about that? 1) Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM Sidhi Programme. 2) If you choose to learn Advanced Techniques you will find that they are not at all expensive.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
On 07/18/2013 03:33 PM, emptybill wrote: Hey Bari2 - moksha/mukti, from the root muc means to set free or release from bondage and thus the English word liberation is accurate. As you pointed out, the translation of moksha as enlightenment is inaccurate. (See note below)* Most other organizations that aren't afraid of Sanskrit will use moksha which like you say is usually translated as liberation. But liberation may not mean that much to westerners (they probably equate it with open sex) so applying the term enlightenment in the context of spiritual groups is appropriate. We probably don't need to care much about the academic definition by people who probably never even practiced yoga. It's just talkin' shop. ;-) Bari2: In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. Not just regular TM'ers but TM teachers also – a case in point is Susan Seagal's Collision with the Infinite. Bari2: If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara … Fyi - SSRS (whose sahaj meditation technique is the same) pointed out that all these bija mantras coalesce into omkara at the finest level of experience. He did, in fact, give me omkara with a mahamantra. *Aufklärung –Clearing Up. There is no thing as enlightenment - as that term is used here o FFL. There has never been an enlightenment - whether discovered, realized or attained. That includes immediate insights or gradual understandings. There was only Aufklärung – Clearing Up. Enlightenment? There never was and never will be such a thing - except as the title for a cultural movement in British history. This term was used as a title for an 18th century European cultural era, which in English was called The Enlightenment but originally in German was titled Zeitalter der Aufklärung - the Age of Clearing Up. Recently the term enlightenment became a silly Neo-Hindu neologism (i.e. post-Vvekananda) and Neo-Buddhist synonym for Japanese Zen kensho or satori, particularly by euro-american buddhist writers. Any object, any state or any condition that has a beginning also has an end – by definition. Experience, also by definition, is a temporary appearance to a perceiver. Any experience of enlightenment is likewise just a transient occurrence that is judged (after the fact) to be oh-so-significant. All this is utter make-believe. It is a false interpretation - both of Shankara's Advaita and of Buddhist Mahamudra and Dzogchen. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Re Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM-Sidhi Programme: trying to remember where I read about the insistence on advanced techniques first . . . I've heard about people - including TM teachers - who took the TM-Sidhi programme - but weren't actually able to hop. It must really make you feel a total failure when everyone else in your group are jumping around and laughing and you can only report a failure to launch. Rather like having limp dick in the sack. Did you come across people in that situation on the courses you took? If so, did they get a refund?!? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: I thought you had to do a couple of (expensive) advanced techniques before they'd let you into the hopping room to learn sidhas. Am I wrong about that? 1) Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM Sidhi Programme. 2) If you choose to learn Advanced Techniques you will find that they are not at all expensive.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Well, thing is, is TM-style enlightenment the same as enlightenment defined by some other tradition, or not? There are plenty of physiological states that can lead to teh same general description. The fact that two different states can be described the same way make them the same in some mystical sense, or is it merely an accident of language and culture that they are both considered enlightenment? L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: I meant enlightenment as defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of TM as opposed to enlightenment defined by the physiological changes brought about by the long-term practice of other techniques, such as mindfulness. There's several fundamental differences in how teh nervous system behaves in long-term TMers and long-term practitioners of mindfulness, and most other forms of meditation. Specifically: most other forms of meditation depress the activity of the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for sense of self. TM enhances those same parts of the brain. Most other forms of meditation serve to decouple various parts of the brain from each other, making them less and less in-synch as time goes on. TM has exactly the opposite effect. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term meditators who never got the advanced technique and those that did. That wasn't mentioned in the study. Basically you have researches who probably don't know much about yoga at all: blind men describing an elephant. The topic was enlightenment in general and not TM-style enlightenment of which there is no such thing. Enlightenment is enlightenment. On 07/17/2013 01:49 PM, sparaig wrote: The topic is TM-style enlightenment, and while you have a point about parroting, the first report of enlightened TMers was from a psychologist reporting about 6 of his patients, TMers all, who were complaining of a permanent depersonalization with no issues other than intellectual confusion as to why their I was completely uninvolved with thinking, feeling, acting, remembering, etc. The report prompted the DMS-IV to add a spiritual/religious exception to the diagnosis of depersonalization disorder. The fact that the patients had forgotten, or didn't make the connection, between their
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were too, I *never* heard the term TM Style Enlightenment. That's something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. I made up the term because, using MMY's argument that different states of consciousness are based on different styles of physiological functioning of the nervous system, there are rather obvious differences in how the brain functions in long-term TMers as opposed to long-term Buddhist monks, and apparently practitioners of other spiritual disciplines tend to look more like the Buddhist monks than like TMers. Concentrative and mindfulness techniques tend to have the same general effect, no matter what tradition one claims to be in. Mind you, I always expected samatha practices to end up looking more TM-like, given how they are described, but the devil is in the details of how they are taught: the map isn't the territory. Description isn't prescription, as Judy likes to say. I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many other paths define it. But Buddhists don't usually use moksha that I have seen, and in fact, I am assured that any technique that actually strengthens sense of self as TM does, is, by definition, illusory, so can't possibly lead to true liberation. You can call moksha enlightenment if you want but the word enlightenment carries a lot of implications to westerners that the abstract Sanskit term moksha does not. It's a growing state which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. I've never been confused about CC as far as I can tell. MMY seems to have explained the characteristics of CC reasonably well, and automatically set people up to have lowered expectations by calling it merely normal, as well as referring to it as the greatest degree of ignorance where separation of Self and the rest of reality was at its greatest. The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. Yeah, that Dalai Lama, he's so indifferent to scientific research... They just make their techniques available and if it works for the student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras too should produce different patterns. You're assuming a great deal about what EEG and brain imaging can show, I think, that goes well beyond our current technology. There's a few more advanced papers I have seen recently, that my reveal lots of interesting things, and there's The Human Connectome project meant to map in detail how the various parts of the brain interact with each other, but that's just getting started. L On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
I don't know about expensive. Last I heard, the Advanced Techniques cost the same as the basic TM technique, and I haven't heard of any discount offered for financial hardship. Most people have the wrong idea about Advanced Techniques anyway, I think. They are said to actually slow down the process of transcending which is a contradiction in most people's eyes. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: I thought you had to do a couple of (expensive) advanced techniques before they'd let you into the hopping room to learn sidhas. Am I wrong about that? 1) Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM Sidhi Programme. 2) If you choose to learn Advanced Techniques you will find that they are not at all expensive.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Not everyone hops right off the bat. And while hopping may seem special to people who aren't hopping, and may seem special to some who are, I've never found it to be anything more than fun, with a side-helping of hopeful expectation about spiritual growth. People DID notice radical changes in my character for the better after I came back from the 8-weeks course, but it WAS an 8-week rounding course at that time. And of course, my life got progressively more crazy over the next 29 years, so I don't know that its been a good thing or not to have learned them, even now. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@... wrote: Re Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM-Sidhi Programme: trying to remember where I read about the insistence on advanced techniques first . . . I've heard about people - including TM teachers - who took the TM-Sidhi programme - but weren't actually able to hop. It must really make you feel a total failure when everyone else in your group are jumping around and laughing and you can only report a failure to launch. Rather like having limp dick in the sack. Did you come across people in that situation on the courses you took? If so, did they get a refund?!? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Seraphita s3raphita@ wrote: I thought you had to do a couple of (expensive) advanced techniques before they'd let you into the hopping room to learn sidhas. Am I wrong about that? 1) Advanced Techniques are not required to learn the TM Sidhi Programme. 2) If you choose to learn Advanced Techniques you will find that they are not at all expensive.
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
Different groups claim sahaja for themselves. It is hard to tell which group is doing what when the term sahaja yoga or sahaja meditation is used. http://www.amaye.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/med-connectivity-EEG-tomog.pdf Reduced functional connectivity between cortical sources in â£ve meditation traditions detected with lagged coherence using EEG tomography It is difficult to be absolutely certain that TM yields different results than the above because, for some reason, the authors chose not to include TMers in the study, despite citing references from Fred Travis contradicting their findings that they then proceed to imply apply to TM without doing any research on it sigh. But all research that I have seen suggests that the above findings don't apply to TMers. Whether or not shaha yoga mentioned in the paper refers to SSRS's meditation classes or not, I don't know but if it does, this implies that Sahaja Yoga as taught by SSRS and TM may have different effects. Or, perhaps all the TM research is wrong. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@... wrote: SSRS (whose sahaj meditation technique is the same) pointed out that all these bija mantras coalesce into omkara at the finest level of experience. He did, in fact, give me omkara with a mahamantra. \
[FairfieldLife] The Smoothie [was Re: I create my reality Yeah, right...]
I think spare means TM-style enlightenment, because Maharishi was the first to symptomize the increasing maturity of the nervous system, leading to greater and greater freedom. He attempted to demystify it. So yeah, liberation is liberation, though it helps to keep the relative stages in mind, to differentiate, for example, between the intermediate stage of freedom, CC, and the Advanced/Intermediate stage of freedom, UC. Maharishi always implied that CC, GC and UC are the ingredients, with BC being the resulting Smoothie - lol! The t'ing is, as you know (ha-ha!), all of this makes no difference until it can be directly tied with experience. Then, it makes perfect sense. Though it may not be experienced as linear, it is easy to follow Maharishi's progression, as he taught it, from CC to GC to UC, integrating greater silence into activity, and then the Buddha on the road gets offed, so to speak. The tricky bit is, prior to these experiences, and the establishment of what I will call, The Smoothie, each stage of consciousness is one more thing for the ego to watch and wait for, and attempt to own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: LOL! TM-style englightenment? That's one for the books. As differentiated from all other moksha? Come now, the TM technique is nothing more than common beej aksharas long used in vedic astrology and ayurveda as well as probably a few obscure yoga traditions. The advanced technique has more in common with mantras given to the masses (as opposed to disciples of a tradition). Also any real study might want to differentiate between long term meditators who never got the advanced technique and those that did. That wasn't mentioned in the study. Basically you have researches who probably don't know much about yoga at all: blind men describing an elephant. The topic was enlightenment in general and not TM-style enlightenment of which there is no such thing. Enlightenment is enlightenment. On 07/17/2013 01:49 PM, sparaig wrote: The topic is TM-style enlightenment, and while you have a point about parroting, the first report of enlightened TMers was from a psychologist reporting about 6 of his patients, TMers all, who were complaining of a permanent depersonalization with no issues other than intellectual confusion as to why their I was completely uninvolved with thinking, feeling, acting, remembering, etc. The report prompted the DMS-IV to add a spiritual/religious exception to the diagnosis of depersonalization disorder. The fact that the patients had forgotten, or didn't make the connection, between their state and the CC state in TM theory, suggests that it is a natural progression due to TM practice, rather than expectations. A more recent study looked at non-TMers who happened to be world champion/national champion athletes (compete at the national level and consistently score in teh top 10) vs non-champion athletes at the same level (compete in the same competitions but never break the 50% mark) and found that the champions tended to score midway between teh short-term TMers and the enlightened TMers on both their EEG and their descriptions of self. This also supports the theory that the TM-style enlightenment is a natural thing, leading to similar descriptions of the state, regardless of your spiritual background (none of the athletes did TM or other meditation techniques). L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: And where's the group that practiced other meditation programs? Also TM people start sounding like parrots of stuff they learned from SCI, rounding courses, etc. They can't seem to put their experiences in their own words. On 07/16/2013 11:39 PM, sparaig wrote: People respond to the interview question Describe your self, in different ways, depending on the physiological state of their nervous system. Researchers on the effects of Transcendental Meditation asked for people who had been practicing TM who were reporting a certain kind of experience -- [pure consciousness](http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/content/44/2/133.full.pdf) -- as a permanent trait outside of meditation practice, to respond to that question, and correlated their answers with physiological measures. They did the same with 2 other groups of people, people who had never learned TM but wanted to, and people who had been practicing TM for several years, but didn't report permanent pure consciousness outside of meditation or very frequently during. Researchers than correlated the answers to the question with the physiological measures, and established a Brain Integration Scale, with the [psychological](http://www.totalbrain.ch/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/eeg-of-enlightenment.pdf) and
